* Oliver Jones <oliver(a)deeper.co.nz> [2004-05-28 09:57]:
However the problem really is technological.
No, it is not.
We need ways of verifying the authenticity of sender addresses and their sources. If methods like SPF were universally adopted and turned on by default much of the problem with spam would go away.
No, it would not.
I thought the vast majority is coming out of Russia and China these days.
No, it does not.
So, everyone should configure their mail server with SPF immediately!
That is desirable of course. The problem with spam is neither necessarily solely legal nor necessarily solely technological. The problem is that it is far too cheap to send mail. If even one in 100,000 recipients takes the bait, the spammer is probably making a positive bottom line. So long as that doesn't change, spamming will continue to be a problem. SPF is no real help; domains can be bought and cancelled in bulk amounts very cheaply. SPF will initially slow down the spam rate, possibly dramatically. But you're a fool if you think it will effectively muzzle spam indefinitely. See http://cr.yp.to/qmail/antispam.html In this light, passing laws to battle spam is at least as useful as establishing technical hurdles: it helps increase the cost of spam for the spammer, at least in a roundabout way. If nothing else, it prevents companies in the country in question from getting any ideas. As for where the spam is coming from, currently over half of it originates in the US, according to several sources, as of two months or so ago. Bot networks are probably the primary means of distribution there, so Windows security is indeed an issue. -- Regards, Aristotle "If you can't laugh at yourself, you don't take life seriously enough."